How did we get here?

Insisting that Uefa had to bring some order to rampant overspending and curb wage inflation, Michel Platini envisaged financial fair play as a means to restore a balance. Many of its critics argue it will simply do the opposite, locking in the natural order and allowing big clubs to cement their position because they have the biggest revenues. Others fear it won't have teeth. Uefa argues the rules have already begun to have an effect in forcing spending to be more sustainable and says the regime needs time to work.

Are we finally reaching the financial fair play endgame?

We're getting there, slowly. Following 18 months of accountancy work and liaison with clubs, in mid-April Uefa's Club Financial Control Body met to decide on which clubs had failed its "break even" test. They numbered less than 20, of an initial 76 across Europe that merited "further investigation". This week, the CFCB's "investigatory chamber" has been negotiating settlements with the clubs judged to have breached the €45m leeway allowed over the two seasons under consideration – 2011-12 and 2012-13. The situation is complicated by the fact that clubs can make deductions for investment in their stadium and youth programmes, as well as discounting salaries of any players who signed a contract before the rules were announced. Clubs also get credit for showing a positive "direction of travel".

What punishment will Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain face?

In both cases, a key factor will be whether Uefa's CFCB board has calculated that PSG's deal with the Qatar Tourism Authority and Manchester City's sponsorship deal with Etihad should be discounted under "related party" rules. It is understood that PSG and Manchester City are among the clubs judged to have failed the break-even test and that both are likely to face a combination of financial and sporting sanctions. That will mean not only a fine but restrictions on their squad sizes in Europe next season, most likely via a cap on squad value. Such a ruling would force those clubs in breach to potentially omit some of their more expensive players in favour of homegrown talent.

The sanction has been mooted in recognition of the fact that clubs who transgress must be punished on the field as well as via their bottom line.

Is there an appeal process?

Yes – on both sides. If other "directly affected" clubs believe the negotiated sanctions are too lenient, then they can challenge them. In Manchester City's case, that might mean Everton or Arsenal complaining to the adjudicatory chamber of the CFCB, which will make a decision by mid-June. Alternatively, if clubs fail to accept Uefa's initial sanction then the case will also be referred to the adjudicatory chamber. A further appeal is possible to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which has promised to hear any cases before the start of next season.

What is the point of simply fining the richest clubs in world football?

A good question, but one Uefa will argue it has answered by making sure that the so-called "sporting sanctions" directly affect the offending club's chances on the pitch.

Uefa would argue that it is still possible the independent adjudicatory chamber could take that drastic course of action. But it also says that FFP is more about helping clubs to help themselves and that banning clubs now would send the wrong message. When the calculations are made again in a year's time, with the leeway reduced to €45m over a three-year period, it is likely to be tougher with those who are repeat offenders. Yet to maintain credibility – and ensure the rules are not just widely ignored – the sanctions must have teeth. As such, Uefa's FFP process is walking a tightrope – it must keep the clubs it regulates onside but also demonstrate to the wider world that the complex scheme is working. Meanwhile, it will continue to face questions over the overall concept from those who fear it will simply lock in the established order in European football.

When will we know for sure?

There could be some sort of update before the end of the week, following a meeting of the CFCB investigatory chamber on Thursday and Friday, but a formal announcement of the clubs that have fallen foul of the rules and their sanctions is not expected until next week – assuming clubs manage to negotiate a settlement and there are no appeals.